Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Land Based Oberth Maneuver (gravitational potential energy powered vehicle)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I've been researching a land vehicle concept that takes advantage of a maneuver more commonly used in spacecraft propulsion-- the oberth maneuver.

A more complete discussion of the physics can be found here:
Land Based Oberth Manuever?

I hope it can be built one day because it uses only sustainable fuel- namely a combination of gravitational potential energy, solar, and geothermal.

It requires an underground tunnel, magnetic levitation, and a vacuum tunnel, like the hyperloop, but uses a different form of propulsion, and the tunnel has to be deep.

In essence it's a giant underground skateboard ramp, with an electric motor that pushes off a moving water tank instead of the ground to go faster than an airplane.

I’ve done some back of the napkin calculations to compare a Tesla Model S vs a wormhole vehicle of the same mass & available energy. These are rough numbers just to give an ideal of the potential performance and compare with an automobile.

Long story short with it’s lithium battery pack partially charged up with 45kWh of energy, at roughly 70mph the 2250kg Tesla can do 135 miles in about 115.2 minutes (3mi/kWh). At 13.3 cents per kWh, it costs $5.98 for the energy. The ratio of kinetic energy to total kWH consumed with the Tesla on this trip is about 6.78%.

The land based oberth maneuver vehicle also weighs 2250kg and has 45kWh energy and follows a ramp (maglev in vacuum) which is 4.4km deep. It consists of a 1350kg passenger section (16.22kWh gravitational potential energy), 750kg water (9.01kWh gravitational potential energy), and a 150kg tank (1.8kWh gravitational potential energy) and 18.03kWh of electromechanical potential stored in capacitors in the track. The vehicle coasts down the ramp reaching about 294m/s at the bottom (657mph). The water tank is ahead of the passenger section on a long tether. On the flat section at the bottom of the ramp, the passenger section "reels in" then releasesthe tank with the 18.03kWh electromechanical potential, bringing the tank to a halt on the tracks, transferring all its kinetic energy plus the mechanical impulse to the passenger section. After the mechanical impulse at the bottom of the ramp between the tank and passenger section, the 1350kg passenger section is traveling 1096mph, can go 135 miles in 7.38 minutes (about 15.6x faster). At $0.004/gallon the water costed $0.79 (less than 1/7th the energy cost). The ratio of kinetic energy to total kWH consumed with the wormhole is about 100% (~93.2% more battery energy was converted to kinetic energy).

After traveling up a second ramp back to the surface, the passenger section still has 28.8kWh of kinetic energy. The water is emptied from the tank at the bottom of the ramp and only the empty tank is lifted (the water is left to evaporate). Factoring regen braking with 70% kinetic-to-kinetic efficiency at the destination, and using some of the recovered energy to recharge the capacitors, and some of the energy lift the empty tank, there is still a 0.36kWh excess of recovered from the regen above and beyond the energy used to push the vehicle at the ramp bottom. The excess energy comes from the lowered gravitational potential energy of the water left to evaporate at the bottom of the tunnel. It isn't perpetual motion because the vehicle requires gravitational potential energy to move itself forward, and geothermal and solar energy to lift the water out of the tunnel.

In summary the hypothetical land based oberth maneuver vehicle can theoretically go 15.6x faster, for less than 1/7th the energy cost, with the same amount of energy and mass as a Tesla Model S.

land-based-oberth-maneuver.jpg

oberth.jpg
 
The ratio of kinetic energy to total kWH consumed with the Tesla on this trip is about 6.78%.

The ratio of kinetic energy to total kWH consumed with the wormhole is about 100% (~93.2% more battery energy was converted to kinetic energy).

In my analysis of the Tesla where I stated "The ratio of kinetic energy to total kWH consumed with the Tesla is about 6.78%..." I put the decimal in the wrong place, it is actually 0.68%... so where I said "The ratio of kinetic energy to total kWH consumed with the wormhole is about 100% (~93.2% more battery energy was converted to kinetic energy)..." the land based oberth maneuver vehicle converts about 99.3% more of its potential energy into kinetic energy than the Tesla S.

(2250kg @ 70mph) has 0.306kWh of kinetic energy, which is 0.6% of the energy consumed in a trip that consumes 45kWh.

In other words more than 99% of the energy the tesla uses in the trip with 45kWh at 70mph is used to move air out of the way, deform tires and generate waste heat in the battery and motors, rather than produce vehicle kinetic energy.
 
(re-posted because I thought I couldn’t create a new thread as a new member, but I just had to strip out the images)

I've been researching a land vehicle concept that takes advantage of a maneuver more commonly used in spacecraft propulsion-- the oberth maneuver, and an underground tunnel is the perfect environment for it.

I hope it can be built one day because it uses only sustainable fuel- namely a combination of gravitational potential energy, solar, and geothermal.

It requires an underground tunnel, magnetic levitation in a vacuum, like the hyperloop, but uses a different form of propulsion, and the tunnel has to be deep.

In essence it's a giant underground skateboard ramp, with an electric motor that pushes off a moving water tank instead of the ground to go faster than an airplane.

I’ve done some back of the napkin calculations to compare a Tesla Model S vs a land based oberth maneuver vehicle of the same mass & available energy. These are rough numbers just to give an idea of the potential performance and compare with an automobile.

Long story short with it’s lithium battery pack partially charged up with 45kWh of energy, at roughly 70mph the 2250kg Tesla can do 135 miles in about 115.2 minutes (3mi/kWh). At 13.3 cents per kWh, it costs $5.98 for the energy. The ratio of kinetic energy to total kWH consumed with the Tesla on this trip is about 0.67%. (2250kg @ 70mph has 0.306kWh kinetic energy vs 45kWh consumed on the trip)

The land based oberth maneuver vehicle also weighs 2250kg and has 45kWh energy and follows a ramp (maglev in vacuum) which is 4.4km deep. It consists of a 1350kg passenger section (16.22kWh gravitational potential energy), 750kg water (9.01kWh gravitational potential energy), and a 150kg tank (1.8kWh gravitational potential energy) and 18.03kWh of electromechanical potential stored in capacitors in the track. The vehicle coasts down the ramp reaching about 294m/s at the bottom (657mph). The water tank is ahead of the passenger section on a long tether. On the flat section at the bottom of the ramp, the passenger section "reels in" then releases the tank with the 18.03kWh electromechanical potential, bringing the tank to a halt on the tracks (from conservation of momentum), transferring all its kinetic energy plus the mechanical impulse to the passenger section. After the mechanical impulse at the bottom of the ramp between the tank and passenger section, the 1350kg passenger section is traveling 1096mph, can go 135 miles in 7.38 minutes (about 15.6x faster). At $0.004/gallon the water costed $0.79 (less than 1/7th the energy cost). The ratio of kinetic energy to total kWH consumed with the land based oberth maneuver vehicle is about 100% (~99.3% more of the vehicle's potential energy was converted to kinetic energy).

After traveling up a second ramp back to the surface, the passenger section still has 28.8kWh of kinetic energy. The water is emptied from the tank at the bottom of the ramp and only the empty tank is lifted (the water is left to evaporate, and rock temp increases with depth). Factoring regen braking with 70% kinetic-to-kinetic efficiency at the destination, and using some of the recovered energy to recharge the capacitors, and some of the energy lift the empty tank, there is still a 0.36kWh excess of recovered energy from the regen above and beyond the energy used to push the vehicle at the ramp bottom. The excess energy comes from the lowered gravitational potential energy of the water left to evaporate at the bottom of the tunnel. It isn't perpetual motion because the vehicle requires gravitational potential energy to move itself forward, and geothermal and solar energy to lift the water out of the tunnel.

In summary the hypothetical land based oberth maneuver vehicle can theoretically go 15.6x faster, for less than 1/7th the energy cost, with the same amount of energy and mass as a Tesla Model S.

Does anyone think it will ever be built?
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Johann Koeber
Evaporation doesn't make water disappear, it just turns it into a gas. So your "vacuum" will need to be continuously pumped out. Maybe this isn't a problem... it would depend on the length and volume of the tunnel I guess. To some extent, you're just moving the energy expenditure to outside the vehicle, which you could have done by just using linear accelerators powered from the ground.
 
I had envisioned the water being emptied into and evaporating from a separate chamber at atmospheric pressure.

Since evaporation is proportional to surface area and temperature, I had imagined it being emptied into shallow but wide pools, at a depth where the rock temperature is significant... perhaps it could even be turned to steam from geothermal heat if deep enough?
 
To some extent, you're just moving the energy expenditure to outside the vehicle, which you could have done by just using linear accelerators powered from the ground.

Suppose we use the same amount of water (750kg + 150kg tank) to move a 40000kg passenger/freight section instead of 1350kg passenger section in the previous example.

In this case with more freight, from conservation of momentum, the mechanical impulse that stops the same mass water tank is only 11.06kWh instead of 18.03kWh in the original example. The gravitational potential energy of the water + tank at the surface is still the same - roughly 9.8kWh.

At the bottom of the 4.412km ramp after the mechanical impulse the 40000kg load has 502.7kWh of kinetic energy and is traveling 672.9mph.

To get the same load up to the same velocity with linear accelerators you'd need a lot more stored electrical energy-- at least 502.7kWh factoring 0 losses.

Factoring the 30% unrecoverable energy loss after regen braking the linear accelerated load at the same 70% kinetic to kinetic efficiency--

The energy irrecoverably lost using the linear acceleration would be about 150.81kWh.

With the land based oberth maneuver, if we factor capturing recovering 70% of the kinetic energy at the surface after the load climbs a second ramp to the surface, and using all of it to lift the empty trailer AND the water, then it takes an additional outside energy input of 6.56kWh to get the water out of the tunnel.

So in the scenario with a 40000kg load, to get the same speed with linear accelerators requires electrical storage/loss of 502.7kWh/150.81kWh for the same performance vs 11.06kWh/6.56kWh storage/loss with the land based oberth maneuver (95.66% less energy lost per load).

40000kg.jpg
 
I think you're talking to yourself here, since I'm not going to bother engaging again.

I had been responding to your comparison with using linear accelerators...

suppose the 40,000kg load i mentioned being shipping containers... think of how much energy big rigs use... wouldn’t it make sense to use the gravitational potential energy of the container itself as the fuel rather than electricity to reduce losses? the example I showed had 95% lower losses for the same transit speed or am I missing something? the hole would be too expensive to dig that deep?
 
it isnt quite as efficient as the passenger vehicle traveling at depth, but....

in the following diagram, the vehicle (in vacuum) accelerates from gravity pulling down the water tank until the tank reaches the flat section at the bottom of the tunnel, at which point the vehicle applies a mechanical impulse to the tether sufficient to stop the tank, which transfers 100% of the mechanical impulse plus the kinetic energy of the tank to the vehicle. afterwards only the empty tank is lifted and the water is placed in direct contact with a geothermal heat source to produce electricity, and a portion of the kinetic energy of the vehicle is captured at the destination via regen braking.

surface.jpg